Medical records issue to be decided in court

A recent judgment says a former Capital Health staffer who allegedly accessed the medical records of two people will have to defend herself in court.

The written decision said an action the co-defendant hoped to steer away from court regarding one of the plaintiffs, into the domain of the labour-relations grievance process, is in essence a disagreement between a patient and health-care provider.

As such, the dispute can be dealt with by the courts.

The June 25 ruling from Justice Cindy Bourgeois dismissed motions by the defendants, Capital district health authority and former authority employee Linda Fougere to have the legal proceeding dealt with in the labour-relations realm.

A Nova Scotia Supreme Court hearing occurred in April in Halifax.

It is alleged the private medical records of Stephen Slack and Elizabeth Gidney were accessed “without valid reason,” the judgment said. Gidney was also a worker with the health authority and was a member of a union that is party to a contract with the employer, it said.

She has asserted “the dispute arises from her relationship, just as Mr. Slack’s does, with the health authority as a patient,” not as a unionized worker.

In dismissing the defendants’ argument, the judge agreed and ruled the court has jurisdiction to hear the matter.

“Just because the defendant Fougere’s status as an employee facilitated her access to the (medical) information and brings her within the parameters of her collective agreement in terms of the consequences of her actions,” Bourgeois’ decision said, “such does not serve to alter the ‘essential character’ of the dispute between the plaintiff Gidney and the health authority.”

The ruling states “this dispute is about their relationship as patient and health-care provider.”